A two-year-old proposal to bring a dozen townhouse units to a property on Eagle Street North passed council muster this week.
The developer had originally asked for amendments to the city's official plan and zoning bylaws to add 15 stacked townhouse units and 20 parking spaces to a property to 932 Eagle Street North, but reduced the number of units for the .45 acre property because of the region's plan to widen the road.
The home is currently home to a single-detached house and the lot width is 30 metres with a depth of about 60 metres.
The change in density for the property calls for 65 units per hectare where only 40 uph is currently allowed.
City staff recommended council approve the changes with a maximum building height of two and a half storeys and room for 15 surface parking spaces. The units will be a mix of one bedroom and one bedroom units plus a den.
Concerns were raised about traffic volume and safety during a public meeting on the proposal, along with issues with parking and the lack of amenity or green space.
Martin Wiens delegated to council asking them to turn down the proposal and stick to the current official plan limit of 40-units per hectare.
He suggested reducing the size of the plan or acquiring more land to accommodate what's being proposed.
"When kids need fresh air, the nearness of the park or trail is no substitute for onsite space," he said. "Too many units means there's no room for that."
There are also problems with runoff from a paved parking lot, and heat since there's no room for shade trees, he said.
Coun. Corey Kimpson recommended a fence along the driveway into the property since the landscaping strip in the site plan is so narrow.
"I wouldn't want anyone on the neighbouring property to perhaps wander on and get hit," she said.
She also recommended the developer consider a contribution to the city's affordable housing fund considering the house currently on the property is being rented and the tenants will be forced out.
That suggestion was followed with an amendment to the motion to support the project that will now require the developer to agree with a $12,000 contribution to the fund. All but Coun. Helen Shwery supported the amendment.
Coun. Adam Cooper questioned the limited parking on the site and asked if there's any room to add.
"We are pretty limited on the site, but we are meeting the bylaw requirements," said Brandon Flewwelling, of GSP Group, noting the city's zoning bylaw for the site requires 1.25 per unit.
Regardless, Cooper said he's concerned it doesn't accommodate much visitor parking and overflow parking will impact surrounding streets.
Coun. Mike Devine again said he couldn't support a proposal with a density that far exceeds the parameters of the city's official plan.
Coun. Scott Hamilton disagreed, saying he's quite comfortable supporting it given the demand for housing and the project's proximity to schools and parks.
He said he wishes there was more room for amenity space and parking, but said the project "has much more going for it in the positive column than the negative."
